• Home
  • About
  • Objectives
  • Membership
  • Donations
  • Activities
  • Research Reports
  • Submissions
  • Newsletters
  • Contact

SPCS

SOCIETY FOR PROMOTION OF COMMUNITY STANDARDS INC.

  • Censorship
    • Censorship & New Technology
    • Film Ratings
    • Films
  • Crime
    • Rape statistics
    • Television Violence
    • Violence
    • Youth Crime
  • Enforcement
  • Family
    • Anti-smacking Bill
    • Families Commission
    • Marriage
  • Gambling Addiction
  • Political Advocacy
  • Pro-life
    • Abortion
  • Prostitution
  • Sexuality
    • Child Sex Crimes
    • Civil Unions
    • HIV/AIDS STIs
    • Homosexuality
    • Kinsey Fraud
    • Porn Link to Rape
    • Pornography
    • Sex Studies
    • Sexual Dysfunction
  • Other
    • Alcohol abuse
    • Announcement
    • Application For Leave
    • Broadcasting Standards Authority
    • Celebrating Christian Tradition
    • Children’s Television
    • Complaints to Broadcasters
    • Computer games
    • Film & Lit Board Reviews
    • Film & Lit. Board Appointments
    • Human Dignity
    • Moral Values
    • Newsletters
    • Newspaper Articles
    • Recommended Books
    • Submissions
    • YouTube

Religious freedom & ‘gay marriage’ cannot coexist- by attorney Matt Barber

April 15, 2013 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Therefore pride is their necklace; they clothe themselves with violence. – Psalm 73:6

“Gay pride” necessitates anti-Christian hate. It must. “Gay marriage” and other “sexual orientation”-based laws do violence to freedom and truth. They are the hammer with which the postmodern left intends to bludgeon bloody religious liberty and the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic.

According to the unequivocal moral precepts of the Judeo-Christian tradition – explicit throughout both the Old and New Testaments – homosexual behavior is sin. Sin is evil. Homosexual behavior is the central, defining characteristic of so-called “gay marriage.” Therefore, “gay marriage” is evil. Christians are obligated to avoid sin – to “do no evil.”

I know; it’s not popular to speak such simple truths in today’s politically correct world. But I’m not out to win a popularity contest.

Most homosexuals know intuitively, I think, that their lifestyle is unnatural and immoral and that the oxymoronic notion of “same-sex marriage” is a silly farce. Thus, they must force others to affirm both their self-destructive lifestyle and their mock “marriages” under penalty of law. They must physically compel everyone to engage their “emperor’s new clothes” delusion, so they can feel better about bad behavior.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/religious-freedom-gay-marriage-cannot-coexist/#AyFzLwKZEllmz8gF.99

Matt Barber is an attorney concentrating on constitutional law. He serves as vice president of Liberty Counsel Action – http//libertycounselaction.org 

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage Tagged With: anti-Christian hate, gay marriage, gay pride, religious freedom, same-sex marriage, sexual orientation

Same-sex ‘marriage’: John Key on “gay” ‘marriage’, civil unions and Brad Pitt

April 14, 2013 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Shortly before the New Zealand general election on 8 November 2008, John Key, who was the then deputy leader of the opposition National Party, was asked by GayExpress Magazine whether he would “vote for civil unions if it were presented again today”. His response was “No”. GayExpress notes that he had opposed civil unions at the second reading of the Civil Union bill in 2004, along with 24 other National MPs. When asked by the GayExpress whether he would vote for “gay marriage” if it were presented today (2008), he answered “No”.

Just four and a half years later, Prime Minister John Key, along with the majority of his party, have indicated that they will be voting in support of Louisa Wall’s ‘same-sex marriage’ bill on Wednesday 17 April 2013. (Neither the National Party, nor any other party indicated in their respective election manifestos that they were intending to bring in or push for same-sex  ‘marriage’ should they become the government)

The Rt. Hon. John Key was featured in television reports on the February 2013 Big Gay Out being kissed and hugged by homosexual men and cosying up to “drag queens”. The Stuff report states:

“John Key is usually popular at the largest gay pride event in New Zealand… It was his seventh time at the event…. Key spoke to the crowd and reaffirmed his plans to vote for Labour MP Louisa Wall’s Marriage Amendment Bill, which would see same sex couples afforded the same rights of marriage as heterosexuals.”

It is noteworthy that when Key was asked by GayExpress “who would be go gay for?” … and “after taking a moment to compose himself”  – he responded:

“‘Brad Pit. Now that he’s a bit older, he’s a bit of a looker. I was going to say Tom Cruise but someone of his age shouldn’t look that age.”

Who John Key would want to have “gay” sex with is apparently of great interest to the readers of Gay Express.

Family First NZ is running a Marriage Pledge campaign calling voters not to support any political party at the next election whose leader has supported Louisa Wall’s bill that supports “gay” marriage.

References:

Express 22 Oct – 4 Nov 2008. Face of Election Special – John Key by Hannah JV

http://www.protectmarriage.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/John-Key-Gay-express.pdf

Mixed reception for Key at Big Gay Out by Charles Anderson, 10 February 2013

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8284962/Mixed-reception-for-Key-at-Big-Gay-Out

http://www.mymarriagepledge.org.nz/

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage Tagged With: gay marriage, John Key, Prime Minister John Key, same-sex marriage

Ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very ­concept of normal sexual behaviour

April 13, 2013 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Yes, “gays” have often been the victims of prejudice. But they now risk becoming the new McCarthyites.

Here’s a question ­shortly coming to an examination ­paper near you. What have mathematics, geography or science to do with homosexuality?

Nothing at all, you say? Zero marks for you, then.

For, mad as this may seem, schoolchildren are to be bombarded with homosexual references in maths, geography and ­science lessons as part of a Government-backed drive to promote the gay agenda.

In geography, for example, they will be told to consider why homosexuals move from the ­countryside to cities. In maths, they will be taught ­statistics through census ­findings about the number of ­homosexuals in the population.

In science, they will be directed to ­animal species such as emperor ­penguins and sea horses, where the male takes a lead role in raising its young.

Alas, this gay curriculum is no laughing matter. Absurd as it sounds, this is but the latest attempt to brainwash children with propaganda under the ­camouflage of ­education. It is an abuse of childhood.

And it’s all part of the ruthless campaign by the gay rights lobby to destroy the very ­concept of normal sexual behaviour.

Source. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1349951/Gayness-mandatory-schools-Gay-victims-prejudice-new-McCarthyites.html#ixzz2QHaLq7l4

Not so long ago, an epic political battle raged over teaching children that ­homosexuality was normal. The fight over Section 28, as it became known, resulted in the repeal of the legal requirement on schools not to promote homosexuality.

As the old joke has it, what was once impermissible first becomes tolerated and then becomes mandatory.

And the other side of that particular coin, as we are now discovering, is that values which were once the moral basis for British society are now deemed to be beyond the pale.

What was once an attempt to end ­unpleasant attitudes towards a small sexual minority has now become a kind of bigotry in reverse.

Expressing what used to be the moral norm of Western civilisation is now not just socially impermissible, but even turns upstanding people into lawbreakers.

The bed and breakfast hoteliers Peter and Hazelmary Bull — who were recently sued for turning away two homosexuals who wished to share a bedroom — were but the latest religious believers to fall foul of the gay inquisition merely for upholding ­Christian values.

Catholic adoption agencies were forced to shut down after they refused to place ­children with same-sex couples. Marriage registrars were forced to step down for refusing to officiate at civil unions.

Christian street preacher Dale McAlpine was charged with making threatening, ­abusive or insulting remarks for saying homosexuality was a sin to passers-by in Workington, Cumbria. In the event, the case against him was dropped and he won a police apology and compensation.

It seems that just about everything in Britain is now run according to the gay agenda.

For, in addition to the requirement for gay-friendly hotels, gay adoption and gay mathematics, now comes, apparently, gay drugs policy.

Last week, the Government announced the appointment of some new ­members to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, who included a GP by the name of  Hans-Christian Raabe.

Dr Raabe has long maintained a close interest in drug policy, on which he has robustly traditional views. He has spoken out in favour of ­abstinence-based approaches and criticised the flawed logic behind the claim that it is the illegality of drugs such as ­cannabis that is the problem.

Considering the unhappy fact that over recent years many on the Advisory Council have taken the ultra-liberal view that ­treating drug-users is the priority rather than reducing their numbers, Dr Raabe’s membership of the council was very ­welcome news.

But as soon as his appointment was announced, Dr Raabe was targeted in an astonishing attack.

For he is also a leading member of the Manchester-based Maranatha Community, which is dedicated to re-establishing ­Christian values in society and which campaigns against gay rights.

It was the BBC’s Home Editor Mark ­Easton who led the charge. On his BBC News blog, he announced that Dr Raabe’s views on homosexuality were causing such fury among (anonymous) members of the Advisory Council that at least one member was threatening to step down.

Well may you rub your eyes at that. Just what have his views on homosexuality got to do with illegal drugs? Well, according to Easton, more than one member of the ­council is gay or lesbian.

How extraordinary. Just imagine if the boot were on the other foot and Dr Raabe had refused to serve on the drugs council because some of its ­members were gay. He would be out on his ear within the hour.

How reprehensible of the BBC to lend itself to such a partisan attack. Unsurprisingly, Easton’s remarks provoked more advocates of drug ­liberalisation to join in the blood-sport of baiting Dr Raabe.

Yesterday’s Observer listed among his crimes certain briefing documents he had produced for MPs identifying the benefits of marriage in fighting drug addiction.

He had written, for example, that marriage is associated with greater happiness, less depression, less alcohol abuse and less smoking. But what’s the problem with that? It ­happens to be true.

The Observer reported that drugs charities and experts expressed surprise that someone of such ‘stringent opinions’ could be appointed to the Advisory Council.

Clearly, ‘stringent opinions’ in favour of drug liberalisation are considered entirely appropriate in such circles; but anyone who goes against the politically-correct grain on homosexuality or who has robust Christian views must be considered a bigot and thus have no place in public life.

In fact, anyone truly concerned to end the scourge of drug abuse should be delighted that at last there is a strong voice for ­common sense and morality on the ­Advisory Council.

Penalising religious people for speaking and acting in accordance with their beliefs is neither liberal nor tolerant. It is behaviour more commonly associated with totalitarian dictatorships.

It must be said that many gay people are themselves uneasy or even appalled by this increasingly oppressive use of their cause. Privately, many will say that all they ever want is to live free from discrimination and not to provoke discrimination against others.

After the case of Christian street preacher Dale McAlpine, the gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell spoke out in ­support of the rights of people to express their views against homosexuality — although, by ­contrast, he also endorsed the lawsuit against B&B owners Peter and Hazelmary Bull on the grounds that the equality laws should apply to all.

Of course, for people such as the Bulls, George Orwell’s famous observation that some are more equal than others is all too painfully true. Indeed, the obsession with equality has now reached ludicrous, as well as oppressive, proportions.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has paid £100,000 for a report into how efforts to boost Britain’s coastal fish stocks would affect minority communities including the Chinese, ­homosexuals and Welsh speakers.

And the Department for Transport issued a study looking at harassment and discrimination on ships and hovercraft against a range of groups, including transsexuals.

Many different groups are involved in promoting this crazy, upside-down world of the equality agenda. But the seemingly all-­powerful gay rights lobby carries all before it. If it isn’t careful, it risks turning gay people from being the victims of prejudice into Britain’s new McCarthyites.

Source:

Story by Melanie Philips
24 January 2011

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1349951/Gayness-mandatory-schools-Gay-victims-prejudice-new-McCarthyites.html#ixzz2QHaLq7l4

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality Tagged With: gay agenda, gay curriculum, gay rights lobby, Homosexuality, McCarthyites

Nearly 15,000 French mayors will refuse to perform homosexual ‘marriages’

April 12, 2013 by SPCS Leave a Comment

PARIS, April 11, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – According to the organization Mayors for Children, approximately 14,900 French mayors will refuse to celebrate “marriages” between couples of the same sex. More than 20,000 mayors and assistant mayors have signed a petition stating, “I am opposed to the bill that opens marriage and the adoption of children by two people of the same sex.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/nearly-15000-french-mayors-will-refuse-to-perform-homosexual-marriages

A survey conducted by the French polling agency IFOP offers confirmation of the startling figures, estimating that 52 percent of the country’s mayors are opposed to the bill.

In France, mayors conduct civil marriage ceremonies or authorize others to do so.

According to Franck Meyer, mayor of the town of Sottesville-sous-le Val and spokesman for the group, in a total of 649 jurisdictions, not a single elected official is willing to perform civil “marriages” for homosexuals.

Meyer told the French magazine Le Figaro that “the law (creating homosexual “marriage”) will be difficult to apply throughout the territory, if it is approved.”

“It’s rare for a bill to unite so many local elected officials against it!” he added, and noted that 3,000 leftist officials have also signed in opposition.

“These days, mayors have many other reasons for discontent, for example the electoral reform and the cycle of the school year, but this is the first time that such a group of mayors has been created,” he said.

Despite the widespread opposition of elected officials, as well as massive demonstrations of opposition to the legalization of homosexual “marriage” and adoption, both houses of the French Parliament, the National Assembly and the Senate, have approved a bill to that effect.

The National Assembly is scheduled to review the law again next month before final approval.

According to various surveys in the last two years, more than 60 percent of French say they support homosexual “marriage,” although less than 50 percent agree with permitting homosexual couples to adopt.

The current figures represent a major leap for the homosexual agenda in France similar to that of the United States. As late as 2006, 51 percent were opposed to homosexual “marriage” and 60 percent opposed to homosexual adoption.

Source:  Nearly 15,000 French mayors will refuse to perform homosexual ‘marriages’ group says

By Mathew Cullinan Hoffman

Thursday April 11, 2013

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/nearly-15000-french-mayors-will-refuse-to-perform-homosexual-marriages

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage Tagged With: homosexual 'marriages'

Same-sex ‘marriage’: Teen Suicide tragedies manipulated to advance “gay” agenda

April 12, 2013 by SPCS Leave a Comment

Family First NZ in its submission to the Government Administration Committee on the Marriage (Definition of Marriage) Bill highlighted the misrepresentation of research on teen suicide rates by openly “gay” man Green MP Kevin Hague, a member of the committee, and  by the sponsor of the bill “openly lesbian” Labour List MP Louisa Wall, in order to “advance” their “agenda” (same-sex ‘marriage’). Neither MP nor any other supporter of the bill has responded to the allegations of misrepresentation.

Both MPs have indicated publicly that they are not really interested in getting married to their respective same-sex partners, should the bill pass into law. Their personal disinterest in ‘marriage’, lack of supporting evidence provided, and the legally flawed nature of the bill they are pushing for, has led many opponents to question their claims that legalizing “gay” ‘marriage’ in New Zealand would actually reduce youth suicide rates among the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender, Intersex, Queer (LGBTIQ) community.

The bills supporters have provided no scientific evidence whatsoever for their claims concerning teen suicide rate reductions from any peer-reviewed research publications, and yet a number of MPs now supporting the bill have been persuaded by such spurious claims, including National MP – Dr Paul Hutchison, who represents the Hunua electorate. One wonders why he has failed to present the hard evidence to the country in his speeches on the bill, rather than apparently relying on anecdotal hearsay from Louisa Wall.

see: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10830418

The Family First submission stated:

MISREPRESENTING RESEARCH ON TEEN SUICIDE

We note comments made by politicians and supporters of the bill relating to teen suicide.[i]They have referred to research done by the New Zealand Adolescent Health Research group, and they suggest that the disproportionately high rates of suicide attempts by same-sex attracted teens is due in part to the current definition of marriage.

But significantly, the report says:

“It is apparent that further investigation of potential differences according to sexual attraction is warranted and that studies in the area of human sexuality require some understanding of a range of inter-related concepts, with the issues of definition and description holding particular importance.” (page 5)

And in a comparison of rates between 2001 and 2007, the report says:

“There were no major changes observed between the two surveys (2001 and 2007) in the proportions of same/both-sex-attracted students reporting depressive symptoms or suicide attempts, even though there were substantial reductions in suicide attempts among opposite sex- attracted students over that time.” (page 21)

This is significant because during this period of time, major changes were made to legislation regarding same-sex couples including the Civil Union Act and the Relationships Act. If the assertions were correct, there should have been a drop in these rates.

Massachusetts has been tracking gay high school students for a decade using the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention’s Youth Risk Behaviour Survey. In 2001, gay teens in Massachusetts were almost four times more likely to have attempted suicide (31% vs. 8%). In 2007 — after four years of legalised same-sex marriage in that state — gay teens were still about four times more likely to attempt suicide than non-gay teens (29% vs. 6%).[ii]

What politicians and supporters also didn’t mention was one of the conclusions from the Fergusson, Horwood & Beautrais 1999 study (quoted in the Youth ’07 report) –

“it has been argued that because of a series of social processes that centre on homophobic attitudes, GLB youth are exposed to serious personal stresses that increase their likelihood of suicidal behaviour. However, a reappraisal of these claims showed them not to be well founded in evidence, and reviews of this issue concluded that problems in existing research were such that no clear conclusions about the role of sexual orientation in suicidal behaviour could be drawn.”[iii]

Teen suicide is always a tragedy. But tragedies should not be manipulated in order to advance an agenda.

The attempts to argue that if we allow same-sex marriage, same-sex attracted teens will be less likely to have disproportionately high rates of alcohol and other drug-abuse problems, depression, other mental health problems, self-harm, unsafe sexual behaviour, including HIV risk, and suicide attempts are not supported by research, and are therefore not relevant to this particular debate

References:

[i] http://www.greens.org.nz/speeches/kevin-hague-speaks-marriage-definition-marriage-amendment-bill

[ii] http://www.doe.mass.edu/cnp/hprograms/yrbs/

[iii] http://archpsyc.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=205418

Share this:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Email
  • Print

Filed Under: Homosexuality, Marriage Tagged With: gay marriage, Kevin Hague MP, LGBTIQ, Louisa Wall MP, suicide, teen suicide, youth suicide

« Previous Page
Next Page »
SPCS Facebook Page

Subscribe to website updates:

The Pilgrim’s Progress

Getting "The Pilgrim’s Progress" to
every prisoner in NZ prisons.

Recent Comments

  • John on The term ‘Homophobia’: Its Origins and Meanings, and its uses in Homosexual Agenda
  • SPCS on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Anne on Corporate corruption in New Zealand – “Banning badly behaving company directors”
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000
  • Jake on John Clancy: Troubled Global group costs Christchurch City Council another $37,000

Family Values & Community Standards

  • Coalition for Marriage
  • ECPAT New Zealand
  • Family Voice Australia
  • Parents Inc.

Internet Safety

  • Netsafe Internet Safety Group

Pro-Life Groups

  • Family Life International
  • Right to Life
  • The Nathaniel Centre
  • Voice for Life
(Click here for larger image)

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.